chevys Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Is this still true of Single cab where the lightest version is currently just under 4,700 lbs? I have a feeling that Ford may have given Fox news details for Supercab and Crew cab only, if a single cab 4x2 V6 comes in at just over 4,000 lb I'd be very surprised... and delighted at the same time. Still confused. So how much does the old RCSB weigh and what does the new RCSB weigh? 2.7EB is a big deal but weight is a big deal. Trying to piece this together. Lets get oranges to oranges here. Can any body c onfirm the numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 The average difference in weight has been given, it's 625lbs. The demonstration probably showed you the greatest weight difference (the 2015 5.0L vs. the 2014 is 707lbs--the 2.7 is 25lbs lighter than the 5.0, and the 2.7 weighs 732lbs less than the 2014 5.0). It's pretty easy to infer from that that one or more configurations have significantly less weight savings. It is just as easy to infer that these configurations are probably the configurations that have the least amount of metal in them: The regular cab short box trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 If you don't 'shrink it down', wouldn't it still be a 'monstrous beast?' With the '15 F150, I don't think the issue is weight so much as it is size. Given the weight decreases, I'm betting a RCSB 4x2 is going to be down around 4k lbs. Plus, in my mind, 'making it lighter duty' = 'shrinking it down'. At least, as far as components go. And that is still going to be rather costly. I mean, you have to re-engineer and re-test EVERYTHING! At that point, it is a whole new truck and you may as well just make it dimensionally smaller as well. But then you could not add the sales in to overall annual F-series truck production numbers. I look at the 2015 F150 and the 2014 F150 and the 2015 has a smaller appearing "look" to it...reminds me of when they re-freshed the Mustang a few years back and the stylists tweaked the lines to make it look smaller... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) Still confused. So how much does the old RCSB weigh and what does the new RCSB weigh? 2.7EB is a big deal but weight is a big deal. Trying to piece this together. Lets get oranges to oranges here. Can any body c onfirm the numbers? Ford hasn't shared with is yet, I was merely speculating that the '14 RC with 6.5 bed is 4685 lbs, if it drops 500 lbs, that will make it 4200 lbs..I think that will be close to the mark.. The average difference in weight has been given, it's 625lbs. The demonstration probably showed you the greatest weight difference (the 2015 5.0L vs. the 2014 is 707lbs--the 2.7 is 25lbs lighter than the 5.0, and the 2.7 weighs 732lbs less than the 2014 5.0). It's pretty easy to infer from that that one or more configurations have significantly less weight savings. It is just as easy to infer that these configurations are probably the configurations that have the least amount of metal in them: The regular cab short box trucks. I had a thought about the Regular cab 4x2 with 6.5' Box, the weight drop should bring it down to around 4200 lbs. Another combination was to use a ficticious 3.5 V6 Super cab 4x2 with 5.5' box, that should be around 4300 lbs. With a light payload, both trucks could be Class 1, slightly under 6,000 lbs GVWR (technically Mid Sized trucks). The RCSB will definitely be in the 2015 line up but would it be worth adding a 3.5 V6 4x2 Supercab 5.5' box companion just to keep touch with mid sized truck buyers wanting a roomy truck but not too much weight... Edited July 24, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 But then you could not add the sales in to overall annual F-series truck production numbers. That is less important to Ford than profit. And who says they couldn't add F100 sales to F-series numbers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) That is less important to Ford than profit. And who says they couldn't add F100 sales to F-series numbers? Exactly. Where would they build it? How much would it cost to un-mothball a plant, retool it, re-engineer the F150 for lighter duty, crash-test it to make sure it's not paper-thin? Basically reiterating here. And then market it to a bunch of compact-midsize truck fans who will still say it's too big because it's not Ranger-sized? Those folks don't want lighter-duty. They want smaller-sized. Huge difference. Pun intended. Edited July 24, 2014 by papilgee4evaeva 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 (edited) Good read on how the '15 was developed: http://fortune.com/2014/07/24/f-150-fords-epic-gamble/ Edited July 24, 2014 by fordmantpw 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 You know, Mr. Fortune Magazine writer, saying, "minimal changes, and long production runs" over and over doesn't make it true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 You know, Mr. Fortune Magazine writer, saying, "minimal changes, and long production runs" over and over doesn't make it true. Yeah, I noticed that too. That used to be the case, but that all changed in the mid to late 90's. Trucks now get constant updates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Yeah, I noticed that too. That used to be the case, but that all changed in the mid to late 90's. Trucks now get constant updates. Ford has been updating the F-150 since 1997 every 5 years or so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 Ford has been updating the F-150 since 1997 every 5 years or so Really, they've been rolling out changes every 2-3 years. 97 - all new model 99 - updated front end and more HP for the 5.4 01 - added SuperCrew 04 - all new model 06 - new fogs and 6.5' bed on the SuperCrew 09 - major updates 11 - 3.7L, 3.5L EB, and 5.0 added 13 - MFT, HIDs, other minor tweaks 15 - all new model Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 I would like to see a comparison between identically equipped 5.0L Super Crew 2014 and 2015 F-150's, along with a crew cab 1500 Silverado with a 5.3L and a 1500 Ram equipped as closely as possible to the Fords. That would be a meaningful comparison. As far as there being only a 25 lb. difference between a 5.0L and an EB 2.7L, my only question would be is if there is any mandatory equipment packages with one engine or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 But then you could not add the sales in to overall annual F-series truck production numbers. I look at the 2015 F150 and the 2014 F150 and the 2015 has a smaller appearing "look" to it...reminds me of when they re-freshed the Mustang a few years back and the stylists tweaked the lines to make it look smaller... I think lowering the bed height has an affect on it's visual bulk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Ford hasn't shared with is yet, I was merely speculating that the '14 RC with 6.5 bed is 4685 lbs, if it drops 500 lbs, that will make it 4200 lbs..I think that will be close to the mark.. I recently drove an 05 F150 that was a crew cab 4x4 with the 5.4 in it and it only felt adequate to me. I am just guessing that it probably weighed in at 5577 according to the specs I found. 300hp and 365 ft lbs for that year. Never was a fan of this engine. 4200 lbs with the 2.7EB should be a world of difference! If you are like me and just love the V8s a 5 liter would scream in such a light truck. I think the 2.7 will be the best selling engine in the lineup. Any guesses on realistic mpg/s for this engine? 26-27 highway mpg? Seems like Ford might have finally hit a sweet spot engine size wise that is powerful and hopefully fuel efficient that can be used in mulitiple cars/trucks if so desired. This one really has my attention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 The 5.4L was just fine. Take a look at the first gear ratio sometime. Let's just say it was not geared to apply force to the ground in an expedient fashion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) I recently drove an 05 F150 that was a crew cab 4x4 with the 5.4 in it and it only felt adequate to me. I am just guessing that it probably weighed in at 5577 according to the specs I found. 300hp and 365 ft lbs for that year. Never was a fan of this engine. 4200 lbs with the 2.7EB should be a world of difference! If you are like me and just love the V8s a 5 liter would scream in such a light truck. I think the 2.7 will be the best selling engine in the lineup. Any guesses on realistic mpg/s for this engine? 26-27 highway mpg? Seems like Ford might have finally hit a sweet spot engine size wise that is powerful and hopefully fuel efficient that can be used in mulitiple cars/trucks if so desired. This one really has my attention. The 5.4 wasn't a rocket, but it was an awesome towing engine. I loved both of mine. Edited July 25, 2014 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 The 5.4 wasn't a rocking, but it was an awesome towing engine. I loved both of mine. I know of a company that has one that has been beatin beyond your wildest imaginations that has 130K on it and it still runs. But just barely. Still not a fan. This company towed with 2/10 of a mile on it wide open over loaded and just has beat it to death. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I know of a company that has one that has been beatin beyond your wildest imaginations that has 130K on it and it still runs. But just barely. Still not a fan. This company towed with 2/10 of a mile on it wide open over loaded and just has beat it to death. The 5.4 could take a lickin and keep on tickin! Not that the new engines can't, but the 5.4 was known for being more of a line backer than a sprinter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 I have a 2V V-10 in my '04 SuperDuty which is essentially a 5.4 with two extra cylinders (I know the crank is offset, etc). My opinion is that it's the best pulling gas engine ever built. I have friends that have 8.1L GM trucks that fully admit I'll pull more weight with better fuel economy (if you can call it that) and Dodge's V-10 never even compared to power of durability. This may be why this engine is still used in heavier chassis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Yup, a 5.4L will take a lickin' from a Chevy LS and will keep on ticking until you replace the cam phasers! Sorry, couldn't resist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Yup, a 5.4L will take a lickin' from a Chevy LS and will keep on ticking until you replace the cam phasers! Sorry, couldn't resist. Funny thing about that. Last instrumented test I saw of the 5.4L had it beating the Chevy 5.3 in the quarter mile. Dang thing had something like a 3.82 first gear ratio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Yup, a 5.4L will take a lickin' from a Chevy LS and will keep on ticking until you replace the cam phasers! Sorry, couldn't resist. What happened when you hooked 6-7k lbs behind each? And you couldn't hear the cam phasers ticking over the piston slap of the GM! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 Really, they've been rolling out changes every 2-3 years. 97 - all new model 99 - updated front end and more HP for the 5.4 01 - added SuperCrew 04 - all new model 06 - new fogs and 6.5' bed on the SuperCrew 09 - major updates 11 - 3.7L, 3.5L EB, and 5.0 added 13 - MFT, HIDs, other minor tweaks 15 - all new model Some more changes 10 - Raptor, all new brakes, FX2, etc. 11 - Electric power steering (first in a pickup truck), the LCD productivity screen, select shift tranny, etc. 12 - auto 4x4, hill start assist, 36 gallon tank EB, Raptor new dif and front cam, FX Appaearance Pack, etc. 14 - Tremor, etc. I left a bunch of the changes out but I wanted to get the Raptor in there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 25, 2014 Share Posted July 25, 2014 (edited) Looking at the the 2.7 Ecoboost, 320 hp/375 lb ft, a 3.6 liter V6 or V8 Ecoboost with similar power density would most likely produce a towering 430 hp/ 500 lb ft. - that's absolutely amazing and completely achievable IMO. While not a diesel replacement, I could see such an engine being very popular in a lot of F Series applications, especially if it can be adapted to E85 and CNG. The next step on form today's 3.5 Ecoboost V6? Edited July 25, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 26, 2014 Share Posted July 26, 2014 Looking at the the 2.7 Ecoboost, 320 hp/375 lb ft, a 3.6 liter V6 or V8 Ecoboost with similar power density would most likely produce a towering 430 hp/ 500 lb ft. - that's absolutely amazing and completely achievable IMO. While not a diesel replacement, I could see such an engine being very popular in a lot of F Series applications, especially if it can be adapted to E85 and CNG. The next step on form today's 3.5 Ecoboost V6? Bore it out just a bit to 4.0L and I think it would be great in the Super Duty! 3.6L may be a tad too small to lug the big truck around without boost, and thus hurting MPG. Of course, if the Super Duty goes on a diet like the F150 and loses 800 lbs or so, that 3.6L would be very intriguing. That would be perfect for towing my 9500 lb fifth wheel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.